Attorneys for Larry Millete, the Chula Vista husband accused of killing his wife Maya Millete, are asking a judge to remove the San Diego County District Attorney’s Office from the case, alleging misconduct by prosecutors and investigators.
The motion, filed last Friday, claims Deputy District Attorney Christy Bowles and others engaged in improper conduct, including presenting false testimony and misinterpreting evidence. If granted, the case would be handed over to the California Attorney General’s Office, potentially delaying the trial, which is currently scheduled to begin in mid-May.
Maya Millete, a mother of three, disappeared in January 2021 and has not been seen since. Her body has never been found, and prosecutors are relying largely on circumstantial evidence in the case against her husband.
“It introduces this whole other element you have to prove beyond reasonable doubt at trial that someone’s life was taken,” said criminal defense attorney David Shapiro.
In the motion, defense attorney Liann Sabatini alleges Bowles “elicited false testimony at the preliminary hearing and admitted evidence that she knew to be illegal.”
Sabatini also claims Bowles “was ignoring her prosecutorial duty to correct said lies and thus being complicit in them.”
The filing further alleges that Chula Vista Police Detective Matthew Grindley downplayed the nature of communications between Maya Millete and a man identified as “Jamey,” with whom she was having an affair.
“It was sexual. It was also very emotional. They would talk about a lot of different topics, then just the obvious,” Grindley said.
The motion claims the two “regularly exchanged photos and videos which involved nudity and sex acts.”
Shapiro, who reviewed the motion, said the allegations could be significant if proven.
“If a third of this is true, it’s extremely problematic. The issue is whether the judge will find one that would disqualify the prosecution,” Shapiro said.
The defense is asking the court to remove the entire District Attorney’s Office from the case. If that happens, the California Attorney General would take over the prosecution.
Shapiro said the motion may also reflect tension between the defense and prosecutors, particularly because the current defense team was not involved in earlier proceedings.
“The issue that current defense team has is they weren’t handling that preliminary hearing, so they didn’t have benefit to cross examine and call out the investigators,” Shapiro said.
He added that the legal battle should not overshadow the core issue of the case.
“What cannot and should not be lost in this. This case is not about the district attorney’s office and defense attorneys, this case is about Larry Millete receiving a fair trial,” Shapiro said.
A hearing on the motion is scheduled for the end of April.
This story was originally reported for broadcast by NBC San Diego. AI tools helped convert the story to a digital article, and an NBC San Diego journalist edited the article for publication.